I think this is how John Paul looks at it. It is believed that the Holy Spirit guides the choice of pope, so you could look at resignation as ignoring God’s will.
How odd that God never says “OK, you’re old, you’re sick, time to quit.”
He does. It’s called “death” 
Yes, nearly nine years after this topic was posted, Pope Benedict XVI resigned, effective February 28, 2013
From the Wikipedia article linked above:
“On 11 February 2013, Benedict announced his resignation in a speech in Latin before the cardinals, citing a “lack of strength of mind and body” due to his advanced age. His resignation became effective on 28 February 2013. He is the first pope to resign since Pope Gregory XII in 1415, and the first to do so on his own initiative since Pope Celestine V in 1294. As pope emeritus, Benedict retains the style of His Holiness, and the title of Pope, and continues to dress in the papal colour of white. He was succeeded by Pope Francis on 13 March 2013, and he moved into the newly renovated monastery Mater Ecclesiae for his retirement on 2 May 2013. In his retirement, Benedict XVI has made occasional public appearances alongside Pope Francis.”
I’m curious what kind of spam bumped this–somebody selling used Popes?
Oh, wait–I thought someone bumped this and got deleted and the most recent post was from 2013, but a closer reading show the bump was today with news from 2013.
Not that makes much more sense…
It wasn’t bumped by spam. There are no disappeared posts in this thread.
Yeah, I’m curious about the bumping, too. I mean, it’s not like this is exactly news to anyone in this thread.
The poster who bumped this thread (a relative newbie) has done that to a lot of old threads in the last week or three. He (?) seems to be reading our archives and just adds something to threads that pique his interest with no regard for the age of the thread.
There’s nothing objectionable (IMO) about most of his posts as such. A couple of his posts have been confused or more of a tangent question than an answer. For sure though, this person is a necromancer par excellence. If you see his moniker, check the previous posts’ dates.
The SD administrators are kind enough to make threads readable from the very start. Each time I’ve brought up a zombie thread, I’ve given notice.
The SD boards are very educational, you know. I’m surprised more people don’t leaf though them. Or maybe I shouldn’t be surprised.
Pilgrim, I’m glad you posted.
Well, some of us have been here long enough that we saw all of the interesting stuff already the first time around
Yes, and heard it first hand from the 2nd Pope St Linus 
Sadly Simon Peter had already retired :rolleyes:
It would sure be nice if there was some kind of warning that would warn a user if they were replying to a thread whose last post was beyond some threshold in the past. That way, they’d have to think “Yes, I do want to post to this decade-old thread.”, and click OK before they do so.
As it stands, it’s trivially easy to do so without noticing, especially if you’re the second or third replier to someone who reanimated one of these dusty old threads.
Well, yes, Benedict seems to have changed the governance of the church 180 degrees by resigning. He signalled that it’s unnecessary and harmful with modern medicine, the church would go through a decade or more of stagnation waiting for an infirm elderly pope to finally shuffle of this mortal coil. Sort of trading the previous model of a sort of medieval monarch for a more modern vision of a chairman of the board who retires when it’s time for new blood and more energy. Things move far too fast in the world nowadays.
I did find the thread title humorous - “Where’s this guy been hiding the last how many years?” In the archives, I guess.
I was surprised to read that Francis had Parkinson’s, until I read the dates…
Bolding mine.
We’ve discussed this unto death in ATMB. Since it isn’t a built-in feature of vBulletin, we’re never going to see it, despite some folks clamoring for it.
Ref the bolded part, I think you meant the first post. Most reanimations happen by spammers or people who aren’t familiar with our culture’s attitude to zombies. So a warning about the most recent post being old would be meaningless to them.
Conversely, you or I *would *react to a warning saying “This thread was started 12 years ago. Are you sure?” But we’d not react to a note that said “The last post was 3 hours ago.” [sub]But if you look up-thread aways you’ll see this is a zombie from 12 years ago.[/sub]
At least in GQ I sort of see the point Pilgrim Shadow indirectly made here: GQ is sort of a rough and ready wiki. When history happens that changes some prior settled fact, it’s not *logically *unreasonable to update existing threads to current status. Whether it’s culturally unreasonable is a separate question.
Speaking just for me, I’m of two minds. A well-executed update is OK … ish. Especially one that’s clearly flagged as an update/revival. I still prefer a fresh thread with a back link to the earlier one, but that’s a fairly soft preference. IMO an ignorant or confused drive-by richly deserves the closing it usually gets.
On a different note: I think the OP’s username is one of the best I’ve seen in a long time. He’s got a few posts from 1999, 2004, 2012. Doesn’t seem to play here much.
I’ve noticed that some threads do put “old” before the date of posts in old threads (all posts in old threads, so in bumped threads you get dates of “old today.”) I see this one doesn’t prefix the “old”, though.